US-UN Ties Still Strained

US-UN Ties Still Strained

Barely a week after Barack Obama plunged into the UN for three unprecedented days, our reconciliation with the organization is already showing fault lines.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

Barely a week after Barack Obama plunged into the UN for three unprecedented days, winning hearts and minds all around for demonstrating that indeed the United States was back, the reconciliation is already showing fault lines.

On Wednesday, the United Nations confirmed that Peter Galbraith, the American diplomat appointed deputy special UN envoy to Afghanistan in March after lobbying from the Obama administration, was being fired “in the best interests of the [Afghan] mission.” Galbraith, a friend of Richard Holbrooke, Washington’s roving troubleshooter in the region, had been berating Afghan and UN officials over what he saw as an inadequate response to the messy and fraud-plagued August 20 elections. Both men have short fuses.

Galbraith–who had been part of Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy gang during the presidential primaries, another interesting twist–was also publicly at odds in Kabul with the UN’s top envoy, Kai Eide of Norway, whose tone in dealing with the Afghan government was more, well, diplomatic. The European media has been pursuing this story for weeks, and saw the crash coming before this year’s General Assembly session opened.

Clinton, asked by reporters about what she thought of Galbraith’s dismissal, would say only that this was “a United Nations matter.” But it will be bait to the right-wing fringe looking for new reasons to trash the UN, even if Galbraith is a Democrat. Galbraith himself has turned on the organization. In an interview with the BBC he said, “I think it sends a terrible signal when the UN removes an official because he was concerned about fraud in a UN-sponsored and funded election.”

Mike Huckabee, a leading Republican hopeful for 2012, was already in the fray, using language in describing the General Assembly session that people around the UN hoped was dead or dying.

On Monday in a Fox News commentary, Huckabee said he came close to pulling out a gun and shooting the TV screen when he saw the UN allowing “murdering thugs and despicable despots” like Muammar Qaddafi, Hugo Chávez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to speak. (Why has discourse, even in foreign affairs, become so violent in its imagery?)

In a neat segue to the president, Huckabee repeated the refrain of the provincials and isolationists that Obama is spending too much time apologizing to the world. It does not auger well for the United States if this line of thinking becomes a theme for the Republicans next year and in the next presidential election beyond that.

The political consequences could be unfortunate, to use a diplomatic word. It is worth remembering that Republicans with similar views did a lot to cool Bill Clinton’s administration on the UN and on international cooperation generally in the late 1990s. The United States backed away then from serious energy and climate change policies. A nuclear test ban agreement was set back. A secretary-general was turfed out in the most inelegant fashion. And all that was before the Bush and Bolton team took over.

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x